Share this post

Link to post

Share on other sites

4 guys in Wasa head for a shallow port, everybody goes into a seperate hostility mission. Takes about 15 to 20 minutes to finish.

Everybody leaves at the same time. 100% Hostility without being able to react as the defender @admin

We are not discussing the method to raise hostility and its time. We are discussing that immediate port battles are advantageous and are similar to old port battle flags but without the negatives (with the exception of some pve)

2 minutes ago, z4ys said:

add only one mission per port at the same time for a nation. That would be best and more fun if pvp is the intention.

griefing makes this idea bad. take a mission and never do it.

2 minutes ago, McMannis said:

Admin I think with the 25% warning what we will have is a group of 20 people going into different missions. They then hold in their missions while they are all complete and leave at once. The port goes from 0 to 100 and it is the end.

amazing - 20 people going into different mission that are open forever. Lots of pvp and potentially free kills

Share this post

Link to post

Share on other sites

in option 1 the fleet would still be there. they have to be there to enter the port battle. They cannot hide behind PVE or log off. They can be split off etc.

true.

I also feel though that the attacker would require to have their PB fleet setup already - this may add a lot of difficulty and such and because of that I would definitely take a look at hostility missions again and adjust them. some ports have 1st rate hostility missions when they probably shouldn't, others have 4th rate missions when they probably shouldn't if you know what I mean.

How should a group doing hostility missions also prepare for a 2,400 BR port? how about a 9,600 BR? maybe it's meant to be that way where the attacker has the advantage in surprising the enemy into a PB, but then the defender has advantage in a port being really easy to defend....? I don't know, I guess I'm just not seeing it yet

Share this post

Link to post

Share on other sites

I'd heavily lean towards this arrangement that I proposed in the server merge announcement a couple days back:

Quote

This is why I'd argue for this scenario: An attacker flips a port using hostility and is then asked to choose between A ) same-day, non-port-flipping port battle (let's call it a raid), that if won will grant the attacker the tax revenue and a chunk of the goods from the contained production buildings they can sail away with if they win; or B ) a port-flipping battle that takes place during the defense window the following day (22 or 46 hours) in the future.

That will create opportunities for on-the-day, spontaneous action that might generate PvP (and still be meaningful from an RvR standpoint), and still provide opportunities for region control.

Share this post

Link to post

Share on other sites

The port would be flipped before they know. Please read my idea up there. It would make for huge battles.

We don't know if we should stop Sudden attacks en force if they happen (havana raid scenario). Organized group attacking an enemy will not give a chance to a defender to react. But! they will have to be a lot more prepared if the battle is immediate. They have to take more reps, they have to organize better before they enter PB, defenders will have to keep ships in their important ports. This is war not chess.

Share this post

Link to post

Share on other sites

We are not discussing the method to raise hostility and its time. We are discussing that immediate port battles are advantageous and are similar to old port battle flags but without the negatives (with the exception of some pve)

griefing makes this idea bad. take a mission and never do it.

amazing - 20 people going into different mission that are open forever. Lots of pvp and potentially free kills

So your idea is we should scout the area of each of our ports to look for hostility missions cause the hostility can go from 0 to 100 in a few seconds causing a pb instantly? Day after day?

Share this post

Link to post

Share on other sites

4 guys in Wasa head for a shallow port, everybody goes into a seperate hostility mission. Takes about 15 to 20 minutes to finish.

Everybody leaves at the same time. 100% Hostility without being able to react as the defender @admin

A much as I love using the shallow hostility missions to grind up slots on ships, they really should be restricted to what ship type swill be allowed in Port Battles. You want to flip a shallow port you have to use a Naigara or below (100 BR or lower) ships to do the mission.

6 minutes ago, Teutonic said:

agreed, grinding ports is boring and tedious.

currently I am in favor of a 24-48 hour window before a Port Battle happens.

What I could envision is a Flag system:

1. purchase the flag

2. bring flag to the port

3. successfully drop the flag - Port battle starts in 22 hours

This way if the defender can kill the flag, a prot battle doesn't happen, but if the flag does drop, it's not like you absolutely need to be on, you can prepare for the next day a lot better

This actually encouraged OW PvP, it was one of the great things about the old flag system. Cause you where told they pulled the flag as soon as it was pulled. Than they had two hours to plant it. I remember a lot of great OW battles where the flag never made it. Hell I remember playing cat n mouse with two frigates trying to plant a shallow water flag. Got it planted at the last moment just as out fleet made it from another battle lol.

3 minutes ago, admin said:

griefing makes this idea bad. take a mission and never do it.

As with the old flag system one of the biggest problems there was no big cool down for false flags. If you pull a flag and don't plant it or get sunk you should be punished and not be able to buy a flag logner than say you plant it or was killed with flag on you. Something like this can be done with now where if they do false attacks they can't do any other attacks for a set amount of time. Tie it to the clan not the players.

2 minutes ago, admin said:

amazing - 20 people going into different mission that are open forever. Lots of pvp and potentially free kills

You have to know they are doing the missions. By time they are done there is no notification cause it's instant 100% when they all pop out at the same time. We done this many a times on Global and I"m sure they have on EU.

Share this post

Link to post

Share on other sites

No because if your nation is more international you don't have to do inconvenient times (players at night raise hostility, other players during the day come to port battles). Nations living in one time zone would be disadvantaged because they will have to attack port twice (hostility at 5 am and port battle next day at 5 am)

But in your original server merge thread you said if hostility was raised outside of port defence time then the battle would not start till the time. So in this case with a delay in the start of port battle the nation with only one timezone members could raise hostility in their primetime and then only have to do one inconvenient time for the port battle. It may give issues with stopping hostility generation, but I think everyone knows that with the current hostility mechanic it is almost impossible to stop anyway, and if it was easier to slow down the rate of hostility gain all it would mean is that people would have to allow longer time to be able to also complete the port battle, or because of the port timer they would run out of time.

What happens if the hostility is not raised to 100% within the port timer window?

Link to post

Share on other sites

Admin I think with the 25% warning what we will have is a group of 20 people going into different missions. They then hold in their missions while they are all complete and leave at once. The port goes from 0 to 100 and it is the end.

amazing - 20 people going into different mission that are open forever. Lots of pvp and potentially free kills

Yes, if the hostility missions was in a fixed location or marked on the map. It is too damn hard to even find the enemy's hostility missions for this to be a thing.

Option 1 heavily favours the aggressors, while option 2 is more balanced.

Share this post

Link to post

Share on other sites

we plan to send notification at 25%. Against large fleets of 50 ships it won't help (because if you have 20 ships and they have 50 you have low chances anyway) but against equal fleets it will give you time to react - especially knowing that port battle will have to happen TODAY. (so they can't just log off for example and come next day.

A further option would be to show the location of enemy hostility missions on the map. This way the defenders can intercept hostility fleets before they go to the port battle. This would enable screening for the defenders (which is no possible in case of an immidiate port battle, where the attacker fleet can sail from the last hostility mission to the port battle unnoticed).

(We all know that the defenders have a disadvantage joining the hostility mission itself due to 10 AI blocking slots).

Share this post

Link to post

Share on other sites

If this is the gameplay we are going to have from now, whats thr point of doing RVR? Fighting bots and taking dots on the map?

no.
Friendly nations already that exist even without alliances can create 9 empty PBs against you for tomorrow or more

Now with option 1 you at least know where the PB will be - because you see the main fleets exiting hostility missions and going to port battles. You can intercept them or fight them and you can't fake this fleet

With option 2 they will hide in the PVE battle and you have NO chance to react because you have no idea which of those 9 fake Port battles is real and have no option to determine where they are.